PhatManBad
Joined Feb 2021
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews32
PhatManBad's rating
Awkwafina should not be the most interesting part of your $150 million kung fu movie.
She wasn't great (sometimes she was a bit annoying, to be honest), but everyone else was forgettable. Shang-Chi himself was the generic "slacker with potential" character with no personality. And he was a live wire compared to the rest of the cast. Aside from Awkwafina, the others seemed to have picked one emotion (either stoic, angry, stern, or "wise") and stuck with it.
Wait a minute, I forgot about Ben Kingsley. His appearance was a nice surprise (I think), but he was a wacky Disney animated movie sidekick with an awful-looking CGI pet monster (who was also a wacky Disney animated movie sidekick).
Shang-Chi strikes me as an American-friendly martial arts movie. Not that I'm an expert on kung fu movies, but I've watched enough movies (including several Marvel movies) to know a factory-made action flick when I see it. The movie is very watered down.
There was, for instance, no effort involved in developing a plot or telling a story whatsoever. It's almost the exact same plot as the CW's Kung Fu series. Family vs. Family.
I wanted to enjoy the fight scenes (I can tell that a lot of effort was put into them), but everything looked fake. Obvious special effects mixed with artificial movie sets. The final battle was two giant cartoons wrestling each other.
As a matter of fact, almost every scene in the movie was covered in computer graphics.
I didn't hate the movie. I can see other people liking it. But I was bored most of the time.
She wasn't great (sometimes she was a bit annoying, to be honest), but everyone else was forgettable. Shang-Chi himself was the generic "slacker with potential" character with no personality. And he was a live wire compared to the rest of the cast. Aside from Awkwafina, the others seemed to have picked one emotion (either stoic, angry, stern, or "wise") and stuck with it.
Wait a minute, I forgot about Ben Kingsley. His appearance was a nice surprise (I think), but he was a wacky Disney animated movie sidekick with an awful-looking CGI pet monster (who was also a wacky Disney animated movie sidekick).
Shang-Chi strikes me as an American-friendly martial arts movie. Not that I'm an expert on kung fu movies, but I've watched enough movies (including several Marvel movies) to know a factory-made action flick when I see it. The movie is very watered down.
There was, for instance, no effort involved in developing a plot or telling a story whatsoever. It's almost the exact same plot as the CW's Kung Fu series. Family vs. Family.
I wanted to enjoy the fight scenes (I can tell that a lot of effort was put into them), but everything looked fake. Obvious special effects mixed with artificial movie sets. The final battle was two giant cartoons wrestling each other.
As a matter of fact, almost every scene in the movie was covered in computer graphics.
I didn't hate the movie. I can see other people liking it. But I was bored most of the time.
I doubt that I'm the first person to compare this show to Family Guy, and I probably won't be the last. That's because the show is so Family Guy (just like every other adult animated series for the past 15 years) it hurts.
Prince George, for instance, is obviously Stewie. He's supposed to be seven years old, but he talks and acts like an adult (which is not funny on it's own). Plus, he's a sadistic, selfish pop culture dispenser.
As for the rest of the characters: It seems pointless to base the show on the real life British Royal Family, because as far as I can tell, each character is a one-dimensional "king and queen" trope.
And the same goes for all of the show's storylines. There's an unhappy royal marriage, a spineless adult prince who constantly gets picked on by his mother, and a child prince who picks on everyone, just to name a few.
Many adult animated comedies have the same crutches, and The Prince is definitely no exception:
1. Characters who are terrible human beings. Not in a fun, hilarious, creative way, like It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia. Everyone is just a regular jerk. Some consider people torturing other people without any comedic style (or an actual point to any of it) to be funny. I don't.
2. Endless gross-out gags that aren't really gags, they just happen--lots of flatulence, gruesome images (such as misshapen "British" faces), puking, bloodshed, and so on.
3. Pop culture references that aren't jokes, they're simply references. Reminding people that Kelly Ripa exists and having guests stars saying "off-the-wall" things isn't funny.
4. Lots of screaming and cursing with no actual jokes attached to them.
5. The "it's funny because blanks don't talk like that in real life" joke, which is about 60% of the show's humor. This includes a sassy old woman, kindergarten-aged kids who talk about Instagram, or royal family members using street slang. Jokes like that were never funny in the first place, but that trope as been around for decades.
These lame, dated comedy tricks must end. But if you still love them, then you can watch Big Mouth (an obnoxious show that's somehow better than this) or the billions of other streaming service cartoons for adults instead. They're all the same.
Don't watch this show.
Prince George, for instance, is obviously Stewie. He's supposed to be seven years old, but he talks and acts like an adult (which is not funny on it's own). Plus, he's a sadistic, selfish pop culture dispenser.
As for the rest of the characters: It seems pointless to base the show on the real life British Royal Family, because as far as I can tell, each character is a one-dimensional "king and queen" trope.
And the same goes for all of the show's storylines. There's an unhappy royal marriage, a spineless adult prince who constantly gets picked on by his mother, and a child prince who picks on everyone, just to name a few.
Many adult animated comedies have the same crutches, and The Prince is definitely no exception:
1. Characters who are terrible human beings. Not in a fun, hilarious, creative way, like It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia. Everyone is just a regular jerk. Some consider people torturing other people without any comedic style (or an actual point to any of it) to be funny. I don't.
2. Endless gross-out gags that aren't really gags, they just happen--lots of flatulence, gruesome images (such as misshapen "British" faces), puking, bloodshed, and so on.
3. Pop culture references that aren't jokes, they're simply references. Reminding people that Kelly Ripa exists and having guests stars saying "off-the-wall" things isn't funny.
4. Lots of screaming and cursing with no actual jokes attached to them.
5. The "it's funny because blanks don't talk like that in real life" joke, which is about 60% of the show's humor. This includes a sassy old woman, kindergarten-aged kids who talk about Instagram, or royal family members using street slang. Jokes like that were never funny in the first place, but that trope as been around for decades.
These lame, dated comedy tricks must end. But if you still love them, then you can watch Big Mouth (an obnoxious show that's somehow better than this) or the billions of other streaming service cartoons for adults instead. They're all the same.
Don't watch this show.
I wouldn't say that the filmmakers were lazy when they made the movie, but the movie is exactly like most biographical films. The movie is a bit too linear: It's an A to B timeline of historic events. And it appears to be the same timeline we've seen before in other movies similar to this one.
Aretha's sturggles feels very indistinguishable to the trials and tribulations that happen to other artists (especially female artists) in their movies. This is because the filmmakers didn't tell her story in a way that doesn't feel like someone reading a list.
Even though the actors (for the most part) did a great job and the dialogue was fine, it's the same going-through-the-motions, soap opera storytelling that's in every bio pic.
Jennifer Hudson was perfect for the role and she did not disappoint, and I still enjoyed myself.
But the movie was just OK.
Aretha's sturggles feels very indistinguishable to the trials and tribulations that happen to other artists (especially female artists) in their movies. This is because the filmmakers didn't tell her story in a way that doesn't feel like someone reading a list.
Even though the actors (for the most part) did a great job and the dialogue was fine, it's the same going-through-the-motions, soap opera storytelling that's in every bio pic.
Jennifer Hudson was perfect for the role and she did not disappoint, and I still enjoyed myself.
But the movie was just OK.
Recently taken polls
2 total polls taken
